DOCSLIB.ORG

Advancing Chemistry. Improving Life

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Advancing Chemistry. Improving Life. annual report 2004 ROBERT A. WELCH The Welch Foundation is a legacy to the world from Robert Alonzo Welch, a self-made man with a strong sense of responsibility to humankind, an enthusiastic respect for chemistry and a deep love for the state of Texas. Born in South Carolina to a prominent family that fell on hard economic times, Mr. Welch came to Houston as a youth and later made his fortune in oil and minerals. Over the course of his career and life, he became convinced of the importance of chemistry for the betterment of the world. Scientists, geologists and petroleum engineers were among his close friends and associates, as were the civic and business leaders of the day. From these associations and his own study, Mr. Welch determined that the pursuit of chemistry and chemical research held great potential for vast good and would continue to have a valuable impact on business, industry, global leadership and the human condition. Mr. Welch gave serious thought to the disposition of his estate. His decisions reflected his belief in science and the role it would play in the future. In his will, Mr. Welch stated: “I have long been impressed with the great possibilities for the betterment of mankind that lay in the field of research in the domain of chemistry.” With his death in 1952, Mr. Welch left a generous portion of his estate to his employees and their families. The balance began what is now The Welch Foundation. 3 Table of Contents 3 CHAIRMAN'S M ESSAGE 4 THE WELCH FOUNDATION 6 THE HACKERMAN AWARD 8 THE WELCH AWARD 10 CHEM ICAL RESEARCH CONFERENCE 12 PROGRAMS 14 FOUNDATION GRANTS 18 PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATORS 32 DEPARTM ENTAL GRANTS 33 ENDOWED CHAIRS 34 FINANCIALS CHAIRMAN’S MESSAGE 2004 Annual Report DUE TO THE FORESIGHT of Robert Alonzo As we prepare for Welch, The Welch Foundation has provided our next chapter, I am grants to support thousands of remarkable honored to announce chemists and their ideas since its founding in the appointment of a 1954. With this support – and the dedication of new member to the countless scientists – we have made tremendous board of directors who progress in advancing chemistry, improving life will offer guidance in and creating exciting new frontiers in the the coming years. Foundation’s first 50 years. Wilhelmina E. (Beth) Robertson joined the We have spent the past year celebrating these board in September and brings a great deal of accomplishments while, at the same time, eager- business acumen and a wealth of experience ly looking forward to the journey still ahead. with community organizations. Her commitment Through the past 50 years, Welch’s grants, schol- to the ideals the Foundation was founded on arships, endowed chairs and awards have helped will be a major asset as we continue on our many scientists in their search for answers. The exciting journey. answers they find are illuminating and exciting – As our 50th year anniversary becomes part of as are the new questions that arise. This ongoing history and we take our first steps into the process has led us to many new frontiers. In future, it is worth noting that things will surely years to come, this quest for knowledge will change. The people involved in our Foundation continue to push back boundaries as new gener- will change, the questions we ask may change, ations of bright chemists pursue their big ideas interdisciplinary lines will continue to blur with insatiable curiosity. and the scientific areas we support may acquire As we know, all great scientific journeys begin new names, but there is one thing that most with a question. Therefore, as we take our first certainly will remain constant: our mission. step into the next 50 years, we must ask our- Since its founding, The Welch Foundation has selves, “What’s next?” None of us knows all the supported scientists who advance chemistry new insights that are even now being gained in and improve life. With our shared commitment chemical labs across Texas – and across the to these ideals, we will continue to advance world. Nor can we specifically predict what our chemistry and improve life for the next 50 years deepening understanding will ultimately mean and beyond. to medicine, materials and technology. A half century ago, Robert Alonzo Welch didn’t know, and probably couldn’t fully envision, where his support for chemistry would R ICHARD J. V. JOHNSON eventually lead us. But he knew then – as we CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD know today – that the journey is fascinating and rewarding. And we know that, in part, because we have come so far in the first 50 years. 5 THE WELCH FOUNDATION Leadership Dedicated to Foundation’s Mission Board of Directors Since 1954, The Welch Foundation has been dedicated to advancing chemistry and improving life through its support of basic research in chemistry. Its mission and ongoing operations are the responsibility of the board of directors, the The board of directors is charged with the stewardship of The Welch Foundation with scientific advisory board and a professional staff, responsibilities that include both the business and scientific operations of the Foundation. all of whom play critical roles in ensuring FROM LEFT Robert Welch’s vision continues to be carried out. Ernest H. Cockrell, secretary J. Evans Attwell, vice chairman Wilhelmina E. (Beth) Robertson Richard J. V. Johnson, chairman Dennis Hendrix, treasurer Long-time Board Member Charles Duncan Retires Charles W. Duncan, Jr. retired from The Welch Foundation’s board of directors in September, after almost 20 years of service. The board recognized Duncan’s lead- ership, dedication and contributions at the Welch Award banquet in October and presented him with a resolution to express its sincere appreciation for his long service, enthusiasm, ideas and dedication to the Foundation. Welch Foundation Chairman Richard J. V. Johnson, left, presents the board’s resolution to retiring board member Charles Duncan for his long-standing commitment and contributions to the Foundation. 6 Scientific Advisory Board STANDING FROM LEFT E. J. Corey, Harvard University Joseph L. Goldstein, The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas Norman Hackerman, SAB chairman, Rice University and The University of Texas at Austin Yuan T. Lee, Academia Sinica and University of California, Berkeley Peter G. Schultz, Scripps Research Institute and Genomics Institute of the Novartis Research Foundation The scientific advisory board (SAB) is comprised of nine SEATED FROM LEFT renowned leaders in chemistry and related sciences, Peter B. Dervan, including five Nobel laureates. The SAB advises the board California Institute of Technology of directors on scientific issues, evaluates proposals for William N. Lipscomb, Jr., research grants, reviews and considers nominations for Harvard University the Welch Award in Chemistry and the Norman Marye Anne Fox, Hackerman Award in Chemical Research, and one of its University of California, San Diego members presides over each annual conference. The SAB Ahmed H. Zewail, also helps oversee the Foundation’s visiting lecture series, California Institute of Technology and departmental grants and other programs. National Science Foundation Laboratory for Molecular Sciences Foundation Staff Led by President and Chief Operating Officer Norbert Dittrich, the staff oversees and implements the day-to-day operations of the Foundation. FROM LEFT Carolyn Kahlich, Norbert Dittrich, Carla Atmar, Kathy Kirk, Rachel Homme, Ron Page, Sherry White, Sindy Eskue. 7 THE HACKERMAN AWARD Ma Honored as Rising Star in Chemistry Fascinated by the structure-function relationship of The Norman Hackerman Award in Chemical Research, established in 2001, recognizes out- biological molecules, Jianpeng Ma uses computer standing young chemists at Texas institutions. In 2004, the award was presented to Dr. Ma, simulation as one tool to explore this connection. A associate professor at Baylor College of Medicine major research breakthrough occurred when he found and Rice University. Dr. Ma is the third person to be recognized a way to simulate protein by The Welch Foundation as a rising star in chemistry. The motion without knowing Hackerman Award pays tribute to the exact coordinates and Norman Hackerman, longtime chairman of The Welch amino acid sequences of Foundation’s Scientific Advisory Board. The award also serves to protein structures. His nurture the advancement of chemistry by recognizing excep- groundbreaking approach tional young scientists for their to biochemistry, biophysics groundbreaking chemical research. Dr. Ma received the honor at a and structural biology Jianpeng Ma (center) is congratulated on winning the 2004 Hackerman Award by Richard J. V. Johnson (left) luncheon held Feb. 3, 2004, in will help scientists better and Norman Hackerman. Dr. Ma is the third recipient the Texas Medical Center in of the award recognizing rising stars in chemistry. understand the chemical Houston. The award included a $100,000 check, certificate and specially basis for diseases. designed “rising star” crystal sculpture. “I am extremely honored to receive this pres- tigious award,” says Dr. Ma. “It is especially meaningful since I received my first grant in Texas from The Welch Foundation. The Foundation’s support has played an important role in my career and has allowed me to contin- ue much of my work. I am excited about the research challenges and possible discoveries that lie ahead, and hope that I can live up to the expectation of this award.” “Dr. Ma is an outstanding research chemist as well as a dedicated educator,” says Foundation Chairman Richard J. V. Johnson. “His love of learning and of teaching, combined with his per- sistence and diligence, are an inspiration to both his colleagues and students.” 8 In his joint appointment, Dr. Ma divides his “Dr. Ma is a rising star in the state of Texas,” time between Baylor College of Medicine’s says Salih J.
Recommended publications
  • Masthead 2019

    Masthead 2019

    Masthead AngewandteA Journal of the German Chemical Society International Edition Chemie Editorial Board Chair: Annette G. Beck-Sickinger, Universität Leipzig Michael Brands, Bayer (Berlin) Editor: Neville A. Compton Holger Braunschweig, Julius-Maximilians-Universität (Würzburg) Martin Brudermüller, BASF (Ludwigshafen) Deputy Editors: Frank Maaß, Nathalie Weickgenannt Thomas Carell, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München Klaus Griesar, Merck (Darmstadt) Editorial Office: Senior Associate Editors: Jens Ackermann, Stefan Grimme, Universität Bonn Jonathan Faiz, Tamaryin Godinho, Hansjörg Grützmacher, Eidgenöss. Techn. Hochschule Zürich Nicole Harrington-Frost, Stephen Horner, (Switzerland) Volker Jacob, Guy Richardson, Rainer Haag, Freie Universität Berlin Rachel Schmidt-Radde, Diane Smith, Christian W. Kohlpaintner, Clariant (Pratteln, Switzerland) Xin Su, Suzanne Tobey Walter Leitner, Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule Aachen Senior Web Editor: Mario Müller Wolfgang Parak, Universität Marburg Erwin Reisner, University of Cambridge (UK) Associate Editors: Eric Castro, Wolfgang Schnick, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München Arno Knappschneider, Kim Meyer Ferdi Schüth, Max-Planck-Institut für Kohlenforschung (Mülheim) Senior Assistant Editors: Gary Battle, Wolfgang Schuhmann, Ruhr-Universität Bochum Christiane Walter Harald Schwalbe, Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universität Frankfurt Assistant Editors: Lisa Pecher, Petra Schwille, Max-Planck-Institut für Biochemie (Martinsried) Polina Smirnov, Laura Woodward Armido Studer, Westfälische
  • Report to DPR from the Panel Conducting the Peer Review of The

    Report to DPR from the Panel Conducting the Peer Review of The

    1 May 7, 2011 Administrator Lisa Jackson United States Environmental Protection Agency Ariel Rios Building 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W. Mail Code: 1101A Washington, DC 20460 Re: Docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0541, Petition to Suspend and Cancel All Registrations for the Soil Fumigant Iodomethane (Methyl Iodide) Dear Administrator Jackson, We are pleased to see that US EPA has decided to reconsider the registration of methyl iodide for its use as a soil fumigant pesticide. We remain concerned about the wisdom of widespread dispersion of methyl iodide into the environment and support the petition to cancel all uses of this chemical as a pesticide. It is one of the more hazardous chemicals used in research labs and in the chemical industry, and it seems counterintuitive that EPA would work on one hand to prevent and document relatively small releases of methyl iodide used in research and chemical manufacturing, while permitting what will likely be millions of pounds to be used annually in agriculture near homes, schools and workplaces. In our letter to EPA of September 24, 2007, (which we sent a copy of to you in February of 2009), we strongly recommended that EPA not register methyl iodide, but if the Agency chose to do so, we recommended that US EPA obtain an external scientific peer review of the risk assessment. While EPA did not commission such a review, the state of California has conducted its own risk assessment and did commission a Scientific Review Committee (SRC) to evaluate US EPA’s and the California Department of Pesticide Regulation’s (DPR’s) risk assessments.
  • Date: To: September 22, 1 997 Mr Ian Johnston©

    Date: To: September 22, 1 997 Mr Ian Johnston©

    22-SEP-1997 16:36 NOBELSTIFTELSEN 4& 8 6603847 SID 01 NOBELSTIFTELSEN The Nobel Foundation TELEFAX Date: September 22, 1 997 To: Mr Ian Johnston© Company: Executive Office of the Secretary-General Fax no: 0091-2129633511 From: The Nobel Foundation Total number of pages: olO MESSAGE DearMrJohnstone, With reference to your fax and to our telephone conversation, I am enclosing the address list of all Nobel Prize laureates. Yours sincerely, Ingr BergstrSm Mailing address: Bos StU S-102 45 Stockholm. Sweden Strat itddrtSMi Suircfatan 14 Teleptelrtts: (-MB S) 663 » 20 Fsuc (*-«>!) «W Jg 47 22-SEP-1997 16:36 NOBELSTIFTELSEN 46 B S603847 SID 02 22-SEP-1997 16:35 NOBELSTIFTELSEN 46 8 6603847 SID 03 Professor Willis E, Lamb Jr Prof. Aleksandre M. Prokhorov Dr. Leo EsaJki 848 North Norris Avenue Russian Academy of Sciences University of Tsukuba TUCSON, AZ 857 19 Leninskii Prospect 14 Tsukuba USA MSOCOWV71 Ibaraki Ru s s I a 305 Japan 59* c>io Dr. Tsung Dao Lee Professor Hans A. Bethe Professor Antony Hewlsh Department of Physics Cornell University Cavendish Laboratory Columbia University ITHACA, NY 14853 University of Cambridge 538 West I20th Street USA CAMBRIDGE CB3 OHE NEW YORK, NY 10027 England USA S96 014 S ' Dr. Chen Ning Yang Professor Murray Gell-Mann ^ Professor Aage Bohr The Institute for Department of Physics Niels Bohr Institutet Theoretical Physics California Institute of Technology Blegdamsvej 17 State University of New York PASADENA, CA91125 DK-2100 KOPENHAMN 0 STONY BROOK, NY 11794 USA D anni ark USA 595 600 613 Professor Owen Chamberlain Professor Louis Neel ' Professor Ben Mottelson 6068 Margarldo Drive Membre de rinstitute Nordita OAKLAND, CA 946 IS 15 Rue Marcel-Allegot Blegdamsvej 17 USA F-92190 MEUDON-BELLEVUE DK-2100 KOPENHAMN 0 Frankrike D an m ar k 599 615 Professor Donald A.
  • Appeal from the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation to End the Nuclear Weapons Threat to Humanity (2003)………………………………………..……...26

    Appeal from the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation to End the Nuclear Weapons Threat to Humanity (2003)………………………………………..……...26

    Relevant Appeals against War and for Nuclear Disarmament from Scientific Networks 1945- 2010 Reiner Braun/ Manuel Müller/ Magdalena Polakowski Russell-Einstein-Manifesto (1955)……………..…..1 The first Pugwash Conferenec (1957)………..……4 The Letter from Bertrand Russell to Joseph Rotblat (1956)………………………………..……...6 „Göttinger 18“ (1957)…………………………..…..8 Hiroshima Appeal (1959)………………………..…9 Linus Pauling (1961)…………………………..…..10 The Call to Halt the Nuclear Arms Race (1980)………………..…..11 The Göttingen Draft Treaty to Ban Space Weapons (1984)…………………………………………….....15 Appeal by American Scientists to Ban Space Weapons (1985)………………………………..…..16 The Hamburg Disarmament Proposals (1986)…………………………………………..…...17 Hans A. Bethe to Mr. President (1997)………..…18 Appeal from Scientists in Japan (1998)……….....20 U.S.Nobel laureates object to preventive attack on Iraq (2003)……………………………………...….25 Appeal from the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation to end the nuclear weapons threat to humanity (2003)………………………………………..……...26 Appeal to support an International Einstein Year (2004)……………………………………………….28 Scientists for a Nuclear Weapons Free World, INES (2009)…………………………..……………31 Milan Document on Nuclear Disarmament (2010)……………………..34 Russell-Einstein-Manifesto (1955) 1 Russell-Einstein-Manifesto (1955) In the tragic situation which confronts humanity, we feel that scientists should assemble in conference to appraise the perils that have arisen as a result of the development of weapons of mass destruction, and to discuss a resolution in the spirit of the appended draft. We are speaking on this occasion, not as members of this or that nation, continent, or creed, but as human beings, members of the species Man, whose continued existence is in doubt. The world is full of conflicts; and, overshadowing all minor conflicts, the titanic struggle between Communism and anti-Communism.
  • The Golden Fleece, Science Education, and U.S. Science Policy1

    The Golden Fleece, Science Education, and U.S. Science Policy1

    The Golden Fleece, Science Education, 1 and U.S. Science Policy Richard C. Atkinson President University of California was pleased to accept Roger Hahn’s kind invitation to participate in I this colloquium series. It gave me an opportunity to rethink some events I was associated with at the National Science Foundation (NSF) in the 1970s. I would like to review briefly U.S. science policy since World War II from the perspective of the National Science Foundation, and in particular from the narrower perspective of science education and the social sciences at NSF. This is a personal account, not a schol- arly one, and I would be delighted if my remarks were to stimulate some aspiring young historians to undertake a more careful study of the events I am going to discuss. My story begins with World War II and the remarkable success of U.S. science in the war effort—a critical factor in our victory. President Roosevelt’s science adviser, Vannevar Bush, had been a long-term member of the faculty at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology; he was one of the key people responsible for building the quality of that institution. Bush had a close personal relationship with Roosevelt. Near the end of the war the president asked him to define a plan for American science in the postwar period. That request led to Bush’s landmark report, Science, The Endless Frontier, one of the great documents of American history. The Bush report defined science policy for the post-World War II era. What was the nature of that report? No summary could do justice to Bush’s masterful analysis, but essentially he made three principal arguments about the future of the U.S.
  • PDF File, 2.06 MB

    PDF File, 2.06 MB

    Introduction Have you ever seen those little About the International Year of Crystallography pictures of a molecule of your The United Nations declares 2014 as the official International Year of prescribed medication? …or a drawing Crystallography. It commemorates not only the centennial of X-ray of DNA showing two strands winding Amoxicillin diffraction, which allowed the detailed study of crystalline material, but also the 400th anniversary of Kepler’s observation in 1611 of the What do around each other? symmetrical form of ice crystals, which began the wider study of the role Molecules are too small to be seen by of symmetry in matter. New Drug Design, normal microscopy. Learn more at http://iycr2014.org X-ray crystallography is one of the DNA Studies few techniques that can visualize them About IUCr The International Union of Crystallography is a not-for- and was used to determine the first Schematic picture profit, scientific organization that aims to: and molecular structures ever known. of DNA • promote international cooperation in crystallography • contribute to all aspects of crystallography X-rays X-rays & X-ray Crystallography • promote international publication of crystallographic research have in common? How They Work • facilitate standardization of methods, units, nomenclatures and symbols • form a focus for the relations of crystallography to other sciences • X-ray beams are shot through • We calculate how the diffracted a crystal composed of the X-rays would look, if they The IUCr fulfils these objectives by publishing
  • Public Perceptions of S&T in Brazil, Funding Crisis and the Future

    Public Perceptions of S&T in Brazil, Funding Crisis and the Future

    Public perceptions of S&T in Brazil, funding crisis and the future Interest in science and technology The interest in science and technology increased 15% in Brazil between the first and the more recent survey CGEE, 2015 Interest in science and technology European Union (2013) x Brazil (2015) 26% of the Brazilians are very interested in S&T, against 13% of the people interviewed in the European Union European Union 2013 Brazil 2015 Not interested Low interested Interested Very interested DK DA CGEE, 2015 Who is interested? DA DN Very interested Interested Not very interested Not interested Illiterate Elementary school Elementary High school University (incomplete) school (complete) degree (complete) CGEE, 2015 Those who have more formal education have more interest in S&T Do you remember... Do you know any Brazilian institution dedicated to scientific research? Do you remember the name of a Brazilian scientist? No Yes DA CGEE, 2015 50% of Brazilians think scientists are smart people who do useful things for humanity Science brings only benefits: 1987–12% 2006–29% 2010–38% 2015–54% What inspires the scientists? Helping humanity (34%), contributing to the advancement of knowledge (17%), contributing to the scientific and technological development of the country (15%) People in the government should follow guidelines developed by scientists Partially agree - 41% Completely agree - 18% Scientific and technological developments will lead to less social inequalities Partially agree - 35% Completely agree - 17% Considering the surveys... - People
  • President's Daily Diary Collection (Box 85) at the Gerald R

    President's Daily Diary Collection (Box 85) at the Gerald R

    Scanned from the President's Daily Diary Collection (Box 85) at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library THE WHITE HOUSE THE DAILY DIARY OF PRESIDENT GERALD R. FORD PLACE DAY BEGAN DATE (Mo., Day, Yr.) THE WHITE HOUSE DECEMBER 16, 1976 WASHINGTON, D.C. TIME DAY 7:25 a.m. THURSDAY TIME il "C ~ ~~ ACTIVITY I----~----I ~ ~ In Out .. ~ 7:25 The President had breakfast. 7:55 The President went to the doctor's office. 8:00 The president went to the Oval Office. 8:18 8:30 The President met with: Wally A. Criswell, Pastor of the First Baptist Church, Dallas, Texas Robert Denny, General Secretary of the Baptist World Alliance, Washington, D.C. Richard S. Brannon, Staff Assistant 8:33 9:00 The President met with: George Bush, Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) Lt. Gen. Brent Scowcroft, Assistant for National Security Affairs 9:05 9:20 The President met with his Assistant, Richard B. Cheney. 9:35 10:15 The President met with: Henry A. Kissinger, Secretary of State Lt. Gen. Scowcroft 10:28 R The President was telephoned by Congressman John J. Rhodes (R-Arizona). The call was not cmmpleted. 10:34 The President went to the Cabinet Room. 10:34 11:30 The President participated in a meeting with members of the President's Committee on Science and Technology and other science leaders. For a list of attendees, see APPENDIX "A." Members of the press, in/out 11: 30 The President returned to the Oval Office. The President met to discuss the status of Kincheloe Air Force Base in Michigan with: 11:40 12:05 John 0 •.
  • May 25, 1963, Approved the Following

    May 25, 1963, Approved the Following

    THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS Office of the Chancellor May 7, 1963 TO THE HONORABLE BOARD OF REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS Mrs. Johnson and Gentlemen: The Budget Dockets prepared by the component institutions listed below are herewith submitted, with my recommendation for approval, for consideration at the meeting of the Board of Regents on May 24 - 25, 1963. Main University M. D. Anderson Hospital and Texas Western College Tumor Institute Medical Branch Southwestern Medical School Dental Branch The following changes affecting Central Administration budgetary operations are recommended for approval by the Board of Regents. RECOMMENDED AMENDMENTS --TO THE 1962-63 BUDGET University Development Board 1. Transfer $1.250, > from the Universitv Develooment Board Publishing- and Mailing account to the University Development Board Clerical Assistants account. In prior years some of the part-time clerical employees hired on a temporary basis for special publishing and mailing projects were paid from the Publishing and Mailing account. Since the Auditor has requested that all part-time employees be paid from the Clerical Assistants account, this transfer will be necessary in order to meet clerical costs resulting from various mailing programs during the rest of this year. (RBC 87) University Lands, Geology 2. Effective April 19, 1963, accept the resignation of Mr. James Roland Mollard, Petroleum Engineer, at an annual salary rate of $6,468. (RBC 89) APPROPRIATION FOR MISCELUNEOUS COSTS - PERMANENT UNIVERSITY FUND BONDS - P -___> SERIES 1963 3, At- the April, 1963, meeting of the Board of Regents the subject bond issue in the amount of $4,000,000 was authorized and the bond counsel was named.
  • Letter from Nobel Laureates

    Letter from Nobel Laureates

    May 19, 2015 The Honorable Eddie Bernice Johnson Ranking Minority Member Committee on Science, Space and Technology U.S. House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515 Dear Ms. Johnson: We, the undersigned American Nobel laureates in Physics, Chemistry, Medicine and Physiology, urge the House of Representatives to eliminate the separate appropriations authorizations for each directorate in the National Science Foundation when it considers H.R. 1806, The America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2015. If the separate authorizations for each directorate are not eliminated, we urge the House to restore the budgets for the Geosciences and Social, Behavioral and Economic Directorates. For the first time in the history of the National Science Foundation, H.R. 1806, as approved by the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology establishes a separate appropriations authorization for each of the Foundation’s directorates. The bill authorizes the appropriation of $1.2 billion annually for the Foundation’s Geosciences Directorate in the next two fiscal years, over $100 million less than this year. The bill authorizes $150 million annually for the Foundation’s Social, Behavioral and Economic Directorate in the next two fiscal years, which is $100 million less than this year. The allocation of funds among the Foundation’s directorates requires a broad understanding of the scientific and engineering opportunities that hold the most promise of advancing scientific and technical knowledge and thus benefiting the nation. The Foundation’s leadership and the scientific and technical experts who advise them are in the best position to make these allocations. The reductions in support for the geosciences and the social sciences contained in H.R.
  • Missions for Nuclear Weapons After the Cold War

    Missions for Nuclear Weapons After the Cold War

    FEDERATION of ofAAMERICANMERICANSCIENTISTSSCIENTISTS Missions for Nuclear Weapons after the Cold War Ivan Oelrich Occasional Paper No. 3 January 2005 About the Federation of American Scientists For almost sixty years, the Federation of American Scientists and our members have played a critical role both in identifying opportunities and risks resulting from advances in science and technology. Our efforts are focused on research and advocacy on science and policy issues to ensure that advances in science and technology make America more secure, our economy more sustainable, and our society more just. The Federation of American Scientists (FAS) was founded in 1945 by Manhattan Project scientists who recognized that atomic weapons had irreversibly changed the role of scientists in national affairs. Our members are united by the conviction that scientists and engineers have a unique opportunity — and responsibility — to help America seize the benefits of their discoveries and inventions and avoid their potential dangers. Our current work is focused on some of our country’s most critical policy challenges: strategic security, information technologies, science policy, housing and energy. Our work is funded by membership dues, philanthropic foundations, corporate and individual gifts, and government grants. FAS is a 501(c)3 organization. Donations and gifts are tax-deductible. Join or donate online at http://www.fas.org/join.html, or contact us at 202.546.3300. The Occasional Paper Series is a publication of the Federation of American Scientists. The purpose of the series is to stimulate and inform debate on current science and security policy issues. Copies of this and previous papers can be obtained by contacting the FAS at 202-546-3300 or by visiting our website: www.fas.org.
  • Open Letter to the American People

    Open Letter to the American People

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: October 18, 2016 AN OPEN LETTER TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE The coming Presidential election will have profound consequences for the future of our country and the world. To preserve our freedoms, protect our constitutional government, safeguard our national security, and ensure that all members of our nation will be able to work together for a better future, it is imperative that Hillary Clinton be elected as the next President of the United States. Some of the most pressing problems that the new President will face — the devastating effects of debilitating diseases such as Alzheimer’s disease and cancer, the need for alternative sources of energy, and climate change and its consequences — require vigorous support for science and technology and the assurance that scientific knowledge will inform public policy. Such support is essential to this country’s economic future, its health, its security, and its prestige. Strong advocacy for science agencies, initiatives to promote innovation, and sensible immigration and education policies are crucial to the continued preeminence of the U.S. scientific work force. We need a President who will support and advance policies that will enable science and technology to flourish in our country and to provide the basis of important policy decisions. For these reasons and others, we, as U.S. Nobel Laureates concerned about the future of our nation, strongly and fully support Hillary Clinton to be the President of the United States. Peter Agre, Chemistry 2003 Carol W. Greider, Medicine 2009 Sidney Altman, Chemistry 1989 David J. Gross, Physics 2004 Philip W. Anderson, Physics 1977 Roger Guillemin, Medicine 1977 Kenneth J.